Gen 2 or 2.5 MPG?

[4D55 Performance]

I only barely do 13 on a pure highway trip. 65-75mph.

Maybe I'm down on power.

Yes that was with stock tires. Back in 2011 I purchased a GEN 2.5 with 26K miles. It still had the original Geolander Tires. The vehicle still looked new and performed fantastic. IF you are only getting 13 I would think you have an issue or most likely multiple issues causing the poor MPG's.

 

[ManfromSnowyRiver]

I would say its the 4.27 and 33s if you have no other logical explanation, and have accounted for tire size in mileage calculations. Undoubtedly 4.27 was a ratio designed to get better fuel mileage, but it creates such an under powered rig that the engine has to be floored all the time, especially with 33s. These days super high ratios are common, and most stock rigs are snails off the line because of it.(personal experience with 2005 Xterra and 2015 4 Runner) But these engines are producing 270hp-300hp and have more gears in the transmissions. The 4:27 was just a terrible idea since HP and Transmission dont compliment it. The 4:27 rigs over heat the instant you hit dirt just to re-enforce how much the drive train struggles. I assume this disaster was created by an increasingly struggling Mitsubishi at the time. Try some 4:63 and see what happens.

I am running 4:90 with my DOHC 96 with 35s, massive lift and silly amounts of weight, and got 15-17 on the Sierras road trip.(no roof rack) That is as good to better then the 2015 Four Runner which suffers from gearing issues as well. I would be curious if our 4 runner would actually do a little better with a different ratio. They must test mileage with 0-60 in 10 Minutes and cruising at 55MPH to make high numerical gearing give good results. That's not me for sure :smiley_drive:

 

[bryAWD]

I average 16mpg in city with 91 octane fuel, and have gotten 400 miles out of one tank (no hwy driving) before. Here's my fuelly account: http://www.fuelly.com/car/mitsubishi/montero/2000/bryawd/322127

I drive mostly in-city with my 2000 Endeavor with 31's. I definately can't complain, I get the same MPG's as a new advertised 2016 4Runner! It does seem a little slow compared to new vehicles off the line with gearing, but I don't care. Is the gearing swap very difficult? I want to go to 33's, but I don't want it to be a total snail, lots of hills where I live.

 

[jeep-N-montero]

I average 16mpg in city with 91 octane fuel, and have gotten 400 miles out of one tank (no hwy driving) before. Here's my fuelly account: http://www.fuelly.com/car/mitsubishi/montero/2000/bryawd/322127

I drive mostly in-city with my 2000 Endeavor with 31's. I definately can't complain, I get the same MPG's as a new advertised 2016 4Runner! It does seem a little slow compared to new vehicles off the line with gearing, but I don't care. Is the gearing swap very difficult? I want to go to 33's, but I don't want it to be a total snail, lots of hills where I live.

You can read any/all of the Montero gear swap threads on here and decide for yourself.

 

[PacS14]

I did not do as good as I had hoped for the second tank due to driving faster and idling quite a bit more, 15.7 MPG with 33x10.5r15 that Dakota digital thing is sounding more and more like the way to go. I just need to find if there is anything similar for cheaper even if I have to put it together myself.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

You think 4.90 gears would be too much for 33x10.5s?

 

[JohnnyBfromPeoria]

You think 4.90 gears would be too much for 33x10.5s?

On what, Clutch? Can't exactly tell what you're driving.

On a Gen 2 with stock 4.625 gears, no. On a 2/2.5 with 4.27's, maybe.

John B.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

On what, Clutch? Can't exactly tell what you're driving.

On a Gen 2 with stock 4.625 gears, no. On a 2/2.5 with 4.27's, maybe.

John B.

Sorry, just fixed my signature. I've got a '98 Montero 3.5 auto, eventually going up to 33's and I'm sure I'll have some added weight from sliders/bumper/extra fuel etc

 

[JohnnyBfromPeoria]

My 95 NEEDS 4.90's (and doesn't have them yet) because the "spread" between 3rd and 4th is too big on the highway when climbing hills on the highway now that I'm pushing 35" tires (stock was 31"). You'd likely benefit most from switching out of your 4.27 differential gearing to the 4.625 sets. Go 4.90 if you're going any bigger than 33's, though. Just my opinion.

John B.

 

[PacS14]

I need to start looking for the 4.625. I have ways to go but getting the right gears is quickly moving to the number 1 spot of things to do.

 

[raysobi]

I'm on the same boat as you! Let me know how it turn out.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

[jeep-N-montero]

I need to start looking for the 4.625. I have ways to go but getting the right gears is quickly moving to the number 1 spot of things to do.

They are all over the junkyards, fall is the perfect time of year to hit the yards for you guys down south because it's cooler.

 

[PacS14]

I've been looking for info in regards to which monteros came with the 4.625 gears. My guess would be the sr models. I was thinking we should have a sticky about gear sizes, and which combination is needed to be accurate on the speedo depending on tire size and model year you are driving on the first page to make it easier for future reference. Information is out there just scattered and full of clutter. Both here and 4x4 wire.

 

[cr4x4cruiser]

For what it's worth...

1999 Mitsubishi Montero SR [U.S. Version] 3.5L / Automatic

Completely stock.

Currently installed with [as purchased] - pathetic - Futura "street tread" tires [P265/70R15]... which are not long for this world.

Tires are inflated @ 31psi [using nitrogen].

Mostly driven on city streets, with occasional highway miles.

Consistently returns 20mpg, using 89 octane [Costco fuel stations].

It is driven [90% of the time] like an elderly woman would drive it, in the Los Angeles area... in other words, no quick getaways from traffic lights, anticipating stops.

Most of the driving is on level streets, lots of stop & go traffic, with minimal hills/ mountains encountered.

If I drove it like a scalded cat I would never see 20mpg... driving up and down mountains, ditto.

Would I ever trade it for something else? Hell no.


Honestly, I do not miss my Landcruiser FJ60 one bit [okay, a smidgeon]... especially with its - perfect operating condition - 12mpg, having a wind at its back, and falling off a cliff.


Bigger [fatter] tires / Lower inflated tires / Agressive tread pattern designs / Taller vehicle profile = demonstrable drop in fuel mileage returns... but you have to admit, they do look more **************'.

 

[jeep-N-montero]

I've been looking for info in regards to which monteros came with the 4.625 gears. My guess would be the sr models. I was thinking we should have a sticky about gear sizes, and which combination is needed to be accurate on the speedo depending on tire size and model year you are driving on the first page to make it easier for future reference. Information is out there just scattered and full of clutter. Both here and 4x4 wire.

This info is readily available online.